[Official] State of Modern Thread (B&R 07/13/2020)

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1945
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 10 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
The Fluff wrote:
10 months ago
idSurge

having fun with their new set. Liking the Ikoria story about the people who bond with animals.
So I can only give a positive response to wotc. :)

Also excited to get my hands on Kaheera, Yorion, and Obosh cards. Image
Even if they're broken, I wouldn't have minded playing with Companions for a few weeks. Unfortunately by the time paper starts for me, the Companion rule will already have been changed. I should have just not bought any Ikoria, but I kind of thought I'd like to keep some Companions in a binder for collection purposes of a "time gone very wrong."

I was kind of happy to buy Lukka too because I want to play the Planebound Accomplice deck, even if the upcoming Obosh change is going to hurt. I just wonder how they're going to do the change since Lurrus and Yorion are SOOOO far ahead in power level than the others?
in a way, I was "forced" to not buy any Ikoria. Get cards almost exclusively from scg, so while they are blocked from sending cards by usps to my country... can't buy anything. When quarantine ends on June 1, would be going to the post office to get Emry which hopefully got through before the block was in place. If companions get nerfed too much. Can choose not to buy any... will buy some other cards with the money.
Image
AnimEVO 2020 - EFZ Tournament (english commentary) // OE 2016 // POF 2018
want to play a uw control deck in modern, but don't have Jace or snapcaster? please come visit us at the Emeria thread

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 10 months ago

I already hate Blake Rasumessen and most of his idiotic ideals, but this telegraphs that they do not see anything wrong with the state of Modern. They see different card names and different arrangements of cards (overlap be damned), and brush their hands together; "Job well done. Diversity."

I'm guessing they will make this change, and let our format rot for at least another month while they "gather data" on how awful it remains. Then, after peak outrage, they'll ban Mishra's Bauble and Abundant Growth, then pat themselves on the back for saving the format.

How on God's green earth are these people in charge of Modern? How does anyone have any faith in them managing this?

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 10 months ago

I dont think anyone is 'in charge' of Modern, and if it is actually Blake, then its no surprise at all that the forum has been this way for years on end.
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 10 months ago

Reminder,
They are still planning multiple bans/unbans/changes for @mtg
This is the time to be loudest about what you want changed!

Let the VIP's know your opinion!
@_bgoldner - Hasbro CEO
@mtgaaron
@mtg_ianduke
@maro254

I have been tweeting like crazy for the last few days. We should blast the hell out of them. This is a time when change is happening so pushing harder now increases the chance our view could affect that change.

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1945
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 10 months ago

if it is on twitter. Better ask a friend to check if they can see your posts. To make sure you are not muted.
Image
AnimEVO 2020 - EFZ Tournament (english commentary) // OE 2016 // POF 2018
want to play a uw control deck in modern, but don't have Jace or snapcaster? please come visit us at the Emeria thread

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 10 months ago

cfusionpm wrote:
10 months ago
I already hate Blake Rasmussen and most of his idiotic ideals, but this telegraphs that they do not see anything wrong with the state of Modern. They see different card names and different arrangements of cards (overlap be damned), and brush their hands together; "Job well done. Diversity."

I'm guessing they will make this change, and let our format rot for at least another month while they "gather data" on how awful it remains. Then, after peak outrage, they'll ban Mishra's Bauble and Abundant Growth, then pat themselves on the back for saving the format.

How on God's green earth are these people in charge of Modern? How does anyone have any faith in them managing this?
On the topic of Blake Rasmussen, some of my friends were trying to figure out what his cryptic message regarding the reprint of Zendikar/MM17 fetches was. On the Academy with the Professor, it sounded to me like Blake said that fetches would NOT be in Standard, they would be reprinted before 2021, and that the product wouldn't be super exclusive.

Now to me, that sounded like it would be in some sort of Masters product - Modern Masters, Eternal Masters, or whatever the %$#% Masters. But it is indeed pretty cryptic because if they're not reprinted in Standard, you are looking at them retaining at least 75% of their current value, which is rising as we speak. I don't want to see them tank. I own them myself. I sold all of the extras I had, mostly because I believed in the reprint and hoped that they would be less expensive to players looking to get into or continue playing Modern (among other formats that the fetches are in too).
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
Albegas
Posts: 127
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Albegas » 10 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
cfusionpm wrote:
10 months ago
I already hate Blake Rasmussen and most of his idiotic ideals, but this telegraphs that they do not see anything wrong with the state of Modern. They see different card names and different arrangements of cards (overlap be damned), and brush their hands together; "Job well done. Diversity."

I'm guessing they will make this change, and let our format rot for at least another month while they "gather data" on how awful it remains. Then, after peak outrage, they'll ban Mishra's Bauble and Abundant Growth, then pat themselves on the back for saving the format.

How on God's green earth are these people in charge of Modern? How does anyone have any faith in them managing this?
On the topic of Blake Rasmussen, some of my friends were trying to figure out what his cryptic message regarding the reprint of Zendikar/MM17 fetches was. On the Academy with the Professor, it sounded to me like Blake said that fetches would NOT be in Standard, they would be reprinted before 2021, and that the product wouldn't be super exclusive.

Now to me, that sounded like it would be in some sort of Masters product - Modern Masters, Eternal Masters, or whatever the %$#% Masters. But it is indeed pretty cryptic because if they're not reprinted in Standard, you are looking at them retaining at least 75% of their current value, which is rising as we speak. I don't want to see them tank. I own them myself. I sold all of the extras I had, mostly because I believed in the reprint and hoped that they would be less expensive to players looking to get into or continue playing Modern (among other formats that the fetches are in too).
At this point, I think the only reprint avenues left are Secret Lairs where you get a random one for each purchase (can't remember what they're called) or the Commander packs that I've seen chatter about. They completely botched Secret Lair UE, we've been told after Khans that they don't want to reintroduce fetchlands into Standard, and they specifically stated that there will be no fetches in Double Masters. Unless said Commander packs has a decent print run with good value in the Rares and Mythics (as well as fetches) I can't see an avenue for fetches to be reprinted that won't also have a disappointingly low supply.

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 10 months ago

Greeksis wrote:
10 months ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
cfusionpm wrote:
10 months ago
I already hate Blake Rasmussen and most of his idiotic ideals, but this telegraphs that they do not see anything wrong with the state of Modern. They see different card names and different arrangements of cards (overlap be damned), and brush their hands together; "Job well done. Diversity."

I'm guessing they will make this change, and let our format rot for at least another month while they "gather data" on how awful it remains. Then, after peak outrage, they'll ban Mishra's Bauble and Abundant Growth, then pat themselves on the back for saving the format.

How on God's green earth are these people in charge of Modern? How does anyone have any faith in them managing this?
On the topic of Blake Rasmussen, some of my friends were trying to figure out what his cryptic message regarding the reprint of Zendikar/MM17 fetches was. On the Academy with the Professor, it sounded to me like Blake said that fetches would NOT be in Standard, they would be reprinted before 2021, and that the product wouldn't be super exclusive.

Now to me, that sounded like it would be in some sort of Masters product - Modern Masters, Eternal Masters, or whatever the %$#% Masters. But it is indeed pretty cryptic because if they're not reprinted in Standard, you are looking at them retaining at least 75% of their current value, which is rising as we speak. I don't want to see them tank. I own them myself. I sold all of the extras I had, mostly because I believed in the reprint and hoped that they would be less expensive to players looking to get into or continue playing Modern (among other formats that the fetches are in too).
Those are the two same guys, who made the Splinter Twin banning happen. They literally said on camera that "Modern was obnoxious with Splinter Twin around and it became a lot better when it was banned". Blake openly admitted that he contributed at the Twin banning and he doesn't want it back. On the one hand, I get him saying Twin was obnoxious to play against, as it was. On the other hand, it was a dubious banning.
Now, I don't want to spark any Twin debate, it's just I am questioning his pioneer/modern understanding.

On another video he said he is playing UR Phoenix and UW Control in Pioneer(my exact two decks), so he is got to at least has some knowledge of the formats. Let's see what happens.
I'm confused because this doesn't line up with what I've seen. I've watched at least 1 video with the professor adamantly pushing for a twin unban. Does anyone have a link to this video with Blake Rasmussen and the professor promoting the twin ban? Im Not trying to restart twin arguement either, I just want to verify this by seeing the source material.
If i am misunderstanding what was being said, someone please clarify for me.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 10 months ago

No, its Blake who pushes for Twin being banned.

Prof is rightly for its unbanning.
UR Control UR

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 10 months ago

It would be nice they even tried to offer up reasons.

'Oh it feels bad', welcome to literally every Modern deck of the last 5 years.
UR Control UR

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 10 months ago

Greeksis wrote:
10 months ago
PS: This video is the proof every twin player should suck it up(me included) and accept it's going to rot in the BL.
"Jace has a grave in Modern."
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 10 months ago

Ok, I did misunderstand, that cleared it up for me. It's the other two against twin, not the professor. That does fit my understanding. Thank you for posting the video. Those were strong words from Steve and blake.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 10 months ago

Greeksis wrote:
10 months ago
Those are the two same guys, who made the Splinter Twin banning happen. They literally said on camera that "Modern was obnoxious with Splinter Twin around and it became a lot better when it was banned". Blake openly admitted that he contributed at the Twin banning and he doesn't want it back. On the one hand, I get him saying Twin was obnoxious to play against, as it was. On the other hand, it was a dubious banning.
Now, I don't want to spark any Twin debate, it's just I am questioning his pioneer/modern understanding.

On another video he said he is playing UR Phoenix and UW Control in Pioneer(my exact two decks), so he is got to at least has some knowledge of the formats. Let's see what happens.
Oh, I don't think Blake has much Modern understanding, yet is even alluding to himself having some. The fetches being reprinted in a larger set are required to push Commander even further. Commander players are being held back by fetches being too expensive, which means that they spend less on Commander product.

Blake is most definitely one of those in charge of making money for WotC and printing $30-90 bills in a set to appease Commander players (Modern and Legacy players are just a nice side effect of that) seems like a win-win for WotC and players who are having trouble affording them now.

*I should have been more clear. The Prof wants fetches for Modern. Blake is saying that they will do them for Commander (and to make gobs of money of course).
metalmusic_4 wrote:
10 months ago
I'm confused because this doesn't line up with what I've seen. I've watched at least 1 video with the professor adamantly pushing for a twin unban. Does anyone have a link to this video with Blake Rasmussen and the professor promoting the twin ban? Im Not trying to restart twin arguement either, I just want to verify this by seeing the source material.
If i am misunderstanding what was being said, someone please clarify for me.
Just to reiterate what the Professor said, he was against the ban. He said at his LGS after the ban, it went from 40 something players down to 10 and even at one point, he showed a picture of just his lonely self at FNM. That picture sparked a debate because it is just so compelling to look at - no one wants to go to FNM just to have not a single person to play with.

Blake may have said that Twin was annoying or whatever. I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of those who helped to get it banned and stay banned.

*Magic has a different meaning to all of us. For some of us like the Professor and myself, it's about that gathering and the community. It's about having opponents to play with. It has to be that first or you don't even make it to the game itself. From there, it's all the wonderful things about the actual game of Magic. For me even with how bad stuff is, I'd still rather have players to play with than not.

-As an example, if Companions and all the other junk stayed in Modern, but my LGS had 60 person tournaments, I would be down vs. Companions being errataed and a few bans leading to 20 person tournaments. Yes, game play is much worse, but at least there is a LOT of game play. I saw an opponent get Thoughtseized by Reid Duke during his Modern League with Lurrus Jund and his opponent had 4 lands in hand and nothing in play. His opponent got Lurrus out and then drew some Baubles while Reid couldn't find removal. His opponent eventually had Reid locked with Lurrus/Engineered Explosives and buried him with card advantage - yes, card advantage in a game where Reid had 2 great cards in hand, a Goyf on the field, but stuck on 3 lands while the opponent had nothing except a Companion in the companion zone. Those games are tough to figure out - do you keep a hand with mana flood because Lurrus advantage can get you there? But I'm getting away from myself - Magic for me is about playing against as many opponents as I can.
Last edited by FoodChainGoblins 10 months ago, edited 2 times in total.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 10 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
Blake may have said that Twin was annoying or whatever. I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of those who helped to get it banned and stay banned.
Blake saying Twin was "annoying" or "obnoxious" must not be familiar with the majority of top decks which have existed since Twin's ban.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 10 months ago

cfusionpm wrote:
10 months ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
Blake may have said that Twin was annoying or whatever. I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of those who helped to get it banned and stay banned.
Blake saying Twin was "annoying" or "obnoxious" must not be familiar with the majority of top decks which have existed since Twin's ban.
There definitely seems to be some inconsistencies in what he was saying. I mean, does he tap out vs. Infect? Does he tap out vs. Affinity when he has even 1 fewer creature (they can play Arcbound Ravager)? As for me personally, whenever a Blighted Agent was on the field and I had no answer, I died much more often than when my Twin opponent had 3 mana open.

I feel it's their own bias. I can't think of a Modern deck that has a sub 20% win rate vs. Twin, but I'm pretty sure that both of those guys played that deck.

The hate that Blake has for fetchlands is really appalling to me. I mean, I realize the shuffling and yes it can get a bit annoying. Shuffling is part of the game though. He said it fixes mana bases too much, yet why did the Professor not ask him about Arcum's Astrolabe in Modern and Legacy? Fetchlands don't fix as much as a person with 2 AAs, 3 Field of Ruins, and an Island casting Supreme Verdict. People are disgusted by that and rightfully so.

*My theory is that a lot of how someone feels about certain cards goes into the feeling that they have when they're playing. Yes, someone cast Karn Liberated on turn 3 and the game was essentially over. But the opponent didn't know it - there was always the out of choosing the wrong mode or whatever. But whenever at least 1 Blue mana among 2 others in is play, you feel threatened. You remember the times when you thought your opponent didn't have it and you felt like you were almost always wrong. I don't understand what the feelings are about. Losing is losing to me and winning is winning. Many players get all in fits about Neobrand and I do agree that it shouldn't exist. But it is legal as of now and some people have to get over winning in only their preferred way, unless that is really more important to you.

**I mean, I remember when my win-and-in was against Grixis Twin and he top decked the 4th Twin, among the first 20 cards or so in his library to win Game 3 of the match (putting me now at 4-2 going into round 7). That felt bad. But I also remember losing on turn 3 to this sequence SO many times - land, Noble Hierarch - land, Blighted Agent, protection spell for my removal, land, pump spells GG opp me putting my SBed cards back in my SB to prepare for the next round. Despite losing so much to Infect, I didn't even want Git Probe banned. I felt that WotC should have waited to see the effects of Fatal Push. But not everyone takes it like this and admittedly I took it harsher with cards like Eidolon of the Great Revel and Ashiok, Dream Render.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 10 months ago

I understand personal bias too, but professionally WOTC staff need to be able to separate that from their decision making.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 10 months ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
10 months ago
I understand personal bias too, but professionally WOTC staff need to be able to separate that from their decision making.
Except they don't. At all. And they seek selective pieces of data in order to support and justify those biases, when not reacting to social media outrage. It's an absolute farce.

User avatar
AvalonAurora
Posts: 162
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by AvalonAurora » 10 months ago

Greeksis wrote:
10 months ago
Back then, NOBODY, and when I say nobody, i mean NOBODY predicted that ban was going to happen. Not even ktkenshinx @modernnexus.
This is wrong.

Plenty of people were predicting a Twin ban back then, mostly because it slotted too well into decks without needing much other cards to support it, other than making sure UR were enabled properly as colors, and it was difficult for some decks/colors to deal with Exarch. Most people who talked about a twin ban back then were talking about Exarch taking the hit, rather than Twin itself. There were some signs Wizards was designing sideboard cards in hopes of containing twin as well. I'd been pointing out to some people back then that I didn't think they'd want to ban exarch, as it's far from overpowered outside of twin and does largely innocent things blue is meant to do, with largely innocent p/t for it's cmc, and if twin was being hit with a ban, the target would have to be twin itself.

I didn't think a twin ban had to happen, but it was certainly something that was considered a potential ban target as a top deck that kept getting stronger as people refined the strategy and learned better what worked and what didn't, and discussions among players about concerns that WotC couldn't print as good cards in blue and red because they'd make twin more powerful.

Twin as a deck didn't have the numbers to justify a ban, it wasn't completely broken, but many people saw it as a concern because it was a top deck that was improving over time, and lots of arguments about people wanting more nice blue and red cards to play besides lightning bolt and remand were getting freak-out posts in response that it can't happen because it would make Snapcaster and/or Twin too powerful.

One of the biggest reasons people were suspecting a twin ban was because twin had started causing bad trouble with sideboards by siding out twin itself for an alternate strategy out of the sideboard, after the opponent presumably sided in their twin hate, which was a sign that twin took too few cards to work for a combo and required overly specific hate to the point that bringing that hate in could be a deteriment sufficient to enable twin to swap strategies and get an advantage just with sideboard slots.

In short, many people were predicting Twin _related_ bans back then, even if relatively few thought that Twin itself was the target, or that the bans would be coming very soon, they just though they were a likely eventuality if the deck kept getting better faster than other decks, and there was at least a perception that eventually something(s) decent that didn't deserve a ban in blue and red would get printed that would push twin decks over the edge. It didn't come out of nowhere, and plenty of people were talking about a potential twin-related ban, and at least I myself had pointed out to some people back then that exarch wasn't likely to be a viable target for the ban if wizards wanted to keep design space open, and twin itself was thus the most likely target.

blkdemonight
Posts: 80
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by blkdemonight » 10 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
10 months ago
cfusionpm wrote:
10 months ago
I already hate Blake Rasmussen and most of his idiotic ideals, but this telegraphs that they do not see anything wrong with the state of Modern. They see different card names and different arrangements of cards (overlap be damned), and brush their hands together; "Job well done. Diversity."

I'm guessing they will make this change, and let our format rot for at least another month while they "gather data" on how awful it remains. Then, after peak outrage, they'll ban Mishra's Bauble and Abundant Growth, then pat themselves on the back for saving the format.

How on God's green earth are these people in charge of Modern? How does anyone have any faith in them managing this?
On the topic of Blake Rasmussen, some of my friends were trying to figure out what his cryptic message regarding the reprint of Zendikar/MM17 fetches was. On the Academy with the Professor, it sounded to me like Blake said that fetches would NOT be in Standard, they would be reprinted before 2021, and that the product wouldn't be super exclusive.

Now to me, that sounded like it would be in some sort of Masters product - Modern Masters, Eternal Masters, or whatever the %$#% Masters. But it is indeed pretty cryptic because if they're not reprinted in Standard, you are looking at them retaining at least 75% of their current value, which is rising as we speak. I don't want to see them tank. I own them myself. I sold all of the extras I had, mostly because I believed in the reprint and hoped that they would be less expensive to players looking to get into or continue playing Modern (among other formats that the fetches are in too).
In other words, Zendikar Expeditions 2 : Jigaloo Boogaloo

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 10 months ago

AvalonAurora wrote:
10 months ago
Greeksis wrote:
10 months ago
Back then, NOBODY, and when I say nobody, i mean NOBODY predicted that ban was going to happen. Not even ktkenshinx @modernnexus.
This is wrong.

Plenty of people were predicting a Twin ban back then, mostly because it slotted too well into decks without needing much other cards to support it, other than making sure UR were enabled properly as colors, and it was difficult for some decks/colors to deal with Exarch. Most people who talked about a twin ban back then were talking about Exarch taking the hit, rather than Twin itself. There were some signs Wizards was designing sideboard cards in hopes of containing twin as well. I'd been pointing out to some people back then that I didn't think they'd want to ban exarch, as it's far from overpowered outside of twin and does largely innocent things blue is meant to do, with largely innocent p/t for it's cmc, and if twin was being hit with a ban, the target would have to be twin itself.

I didn't think a twin ban had to happen, but it was certainly something that was considered a potential ban target as a top deck that kept getting stronger as people refined the strategy and learned better what worked and what didn't, and discussions among players about concerns that WotC couldn't print as good cards in blue and red because they'd make twin more powerful.

Twin as a deck didn't have the numbers to justify a ban, it wasn't completely broken, but many people saw it as a concern because it was a top deck that was improving over time, and lots of arguments about people wanting more nice blue and red cards to play besides lightning bolt and remand were getting freak-out posts in response that it can't happen because it would make Snapcaster and/or Twin too powerful.

One of the biggest reasons people were suspecting a twin ban was because twin had started causing bad trouble with sideboards by siding out twin itself for an alternate strategy out of the sideboard, after the opponent presumably sided in their twin hate, which was a sign that twin took too few cards to work for a combo and required overly specific hate to the point that bringing that hate in could be a deteriment sufficient to enable twin to swap strategies and get an advantage just with sideboard slots.

In short, many people were predicting Twin _related_ bans back then, even if relatively few thought that Twin itself was the target, or that the bans would be coming very soon, they just though they were a likely eventuality if the deck kept getting better faster than other decks, and there was at least a perception that eventually something(s) decent that didn't deserve a ban in blue and red would get printed that would push twin decks over the edge. It didn't come out of nowhere, and plenty of people were talking about a potential twin-related ban, and at least I myself had pointed out to some people back then that exarch wasn't likely to be a viable target for the ban if wizards wanted to keep design space open, and twin itself was thus the most likely target.
Please cite some sources for this claim. I remember a very articulate MTGS user who did predict it based on T8 shares when I was overly fixated on net Day 2/MTGO/T8 shares, but I do not recall reading any articles or major content pieces, even scattered Tweets, that predicted this ban. I do not want to discuss the validity of the Twin ban because that's a dead end topic. I do want to hear some citations for the "many" and "plenty" of people who predicted it, because this feels like alternate history to me. I'm open to being wrong but need to see the evidence first.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 10 months ago

I have said a hundred times that I got the Twin ban right. Make it 101. I held two copies of the deck, and a bunch of staples. Sold a bunch in the three months prior to the ban, keeping a few pieces for Legacy. Even if you don't get the specific card right, you can normally see what is in their targets, and you know when the big events are coming. They always liked a shake up. Even if you miss one window there was always the next. I sold out of a fair few top decks I held prior to bannings, sometimes too early, sometimes not. Pod, infect, Twin, I had them all and sold out. Three tron decks too. Uw, Rg and mono u, got those wrong but I had a vibe that it was not safe. Can't win em.all. The only safe place for your cards is the RL list and four horsemen original prints of good cards. As it happens if you kept your Twin deck in a cupboard you should not have lost money looking at Tarns, Twin today.
Anyway, I don't want to discuss Twin at all. But I will say to those considering their collections, Modern is not a place I would want my cardboard assets parked in.
One more point. Listen to the finance guys- public and private- balls to predicting top 8 shares etc., that is just half the picture. Follow the finances, look at what sets they need to sell, listen for insider info and market action, look for unexplained price data or sales volumes, then think in those terms for bans. Follow the money. Oh, and an edit. Please remember if there are hot tips and predictions, they don't get publically shared on Modern nexus or SCG etc.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 10 months ago

blkdemonight wrote:
10 months ago
In other words, Zendikar Expeditions 2 : Jigaloo Boogaloo
Possibly? That would suck though, as I hoped they were much more readily available than that, even though I own them already. For me, I literally wouldn't care what the price was, even $500 each, if WotC could guarantee that I would have more players to play with. As it stands now, I feel that the higher the prices of Modern cards to a point, the fewer players we will have. Obviously it's not as simple as that and there are so many other factors (looking at you Compadres and Astrolabe), but it is definitely a big factor in my opinion.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

blkdemonight
Posts: 80
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by blkdemonight » 10 months ago

I wouldn't like that either but the way I see it I can see Standard getting enemy variants of Mirage fetches since they enter tapped. We shouldn't hope that future reprints for fetches will be easy to get.

User avatar
AvalonAurora
Posts: 162
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by AvalonAurora » 10 months ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
10 months ago
Please cite some sources for this claim. I remember a very articulate MTGS user who did predict it based on T8 shares when I was overly fixated on net Day 2/MTGO/T8 shares, but I do not recall reading any articles or major content pieces, even scattered Tweets, that predicted this ban. I do not want to discuss the validity of the Twin ban because that's a dead end topic. I do want to hear some citations for the "many" and "plenty" of people who predicted it, because this feels like alternate history to me. I'm open to being wrong but need to see the evidence first.
I was talking in reference to the old MtG Salvation, not the professionals, who I didn't follow at the time. I was still a pretty new player back then and said some stupid stuff in response to the ban being in favor of it at the time. Just a quick search of MtG salvation's previous ban-talk thread prior to the twin ban one turns up occasional discussion of potential twin being in the cross-hairs after Amulet Titan and plenty of posts mentioning and discussing exarch as a ban target or stuff about people being 'concerned' about Twin. You were arguing against such people a lot, so I'm surprised you don't remember.

I wasn't talking about major articles or the like, nor about tweets from significant figures, I was just arguing that the twin ban didn't come out of nowhere and surprise everyone. It was a topic that came up a lot, based on what I both remembered, and can see with the quick search on MtG salvation's ban talk thread just prior to the twin ban one.

Not sure if this link will work:

https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/sea ... 0&submit=y

The thread also has mention of a podcast or something from a former wizard employee who apparently mentioned twin as a potential shake-up ban target along with something from amulet titan, from the sound of it, roughly half a year before the thread, but nobody posted a link to the podcast?

Shake-up bans are a horrible idea of course, but it coming up as a topic that hinted at being originally brought up by an ex-wizards employee that they may have been talking about it internally is another hint, if that part of the discussion is accurate. I have no idea how to search for stuff from an old podcast.

But it's pretty clear that the twin ban wasn't something that surprised anyone and was entirely undiscussed by the community, even if it wasn't sources and ideas you respect, or hard data driven things.

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 10 months ago

Competitive mtg is in serious existential trouble.
Comp systems have issues. Firstly rewards. You need rewarding in a competitive game. That might be a trophy, or a ranking, but by definition it means something for someone that other players don't get. That is a huge turn off for many. Huge. Firstly there will be salty and sulky types smarting at not getting the prize, a universal turn off for all. Secondly, there will be those who push the limits of judge calling to get an edge. Players who have lost if the third game goes on, unless the opponent picks up a game loss for a serious GRV. Players who call judges just to psych their opponent. There will also be the deliberate cheaters. Mtg is full of them. 'Two explores' is remembered but how many high profile cheating players have there been?Even the tron lands marking recently. Finally we all remember those PTQs with one slot for 200 players. That is 199 losers, 1 winner in some eyes. Even wotc themselves are happy to give a leg up to their favoured few, causing outrage. Competitive means trouble for WOTC, and generally angry players.

Their design and aim is at casuals, making comp gameplay worse than it was as their eyes are away from what format x needs to balance. The finances make it hard to stay competitive on one deck. The financial world is riddled with insider trading, and opportunists. I say that as an opportunist- albeit small time and a small way- I am happy to exploit an incoming spike of an older EDH card by buying a few in Europe as they spike in the US. I am also happy to look at data and see patterns, pulling the trigger if I can see a chance for a few bucks on a fifty cent rare, and I am happy to wait a few years to turn each into 10 dollars. Generally I don't care if commander players pay more for their cards, they have enough of WOTC attention, and my margins are small, I never go in for 100 copies of anything. My sales profits go into the decks and cards I loan out, and any collection buying I do and subsequent selling goes to fund cheap duals for locals, as I give a large local discount on sales of Legacy staples to keep people playing, and most of my money is made off last pick draft cards from 20 years ago, but I am nonetheless ok with playing the finance game to make my hobby cheaper, and indeed, I don't go looking for collections- people come to me.

This too upsets some players desperately struggling to keep their comp REL deck competitive with the tier 1 decks. It is never nice to discover that the 10 dollar Phoenix you turned down two weeks ago is being sold by me for 30 and by businesses for 35 and that you need 4. It feels worse when I am selling a dual in the same shop for mkm lowest with part exchange prices. 'That is a good deal, can I exchange x towards the phoenix?'. 'No, sorry, that is just because I want her to play Legacy because I do, and I am giving her a leg up into the format on a safe invesment.' Then there are the bans. Inevitably there are losers and winners. ' My x deck just became tier 1'. ' My deck got banned'.

A plethora of formats divides the competitive players. When you ring round and try to organise an event, you know you are in trouble. It is happening more since Pioneer. An increasingly fragmented player base- the same faces, asked to invest in more formats or drop some and lower the numbers, and Modern's base want totally different things. I want Chalice haters and Blood Moon moaners to **** off and double **** off. Someone else groans when they realise that the opponent does not want to play combat maths as they do.

The removal of points after the old ELO system shows you the direction of travel. Even pre-releases stopped getting t shirts etc. that were used as prizes- I have about 30 prize shirts, really cherished as they signified event wins or finals. I can't remember the last glass trophy I saw. I can't remember top 2 or event wins in prereleases from the last 5 years. They just blur into one. No prizes, and five or more events per weekend. Special they are not. I know my worst finish was 4/18. Or maybe 4/36. I can't remember any more. The number of casuals diluting the events increases event by event. Some are good but inexperienced, some not. It means I only get two rounds of competition on average, maybe three at a push. The others are people at their first events, or those asking about partial mulligan, those with 48 card decks, those tapping out to lay a dude with combat tricks in hand. Sometimes they win a game, but a match is a tall order. Inevitably the few regular serious drafters will occupy the top slots, but the prizes, well we don't exactly get a box for winning any more. Boosters for all, not a trophy in sight. Winning the immense final netted a whole two boosters extra. Casual mtg reigns, and it will continue. At least I once got called 'nice guy in a suit who helped me' by a newbie, even if I was not in a suit, just a jacket. There you go, all those top finishes in the last five years of prereleases and that is my overriding memory. In the days of fifty player releases, one a weekend, you remembered everything.

Modern is in the middle of all this. The unloved middle child of formats, in an era where competitive mtg is dwindling and formats are multiplying at the rate of busted cards and bans. Pre modern? Pre Innistrad Legacy ? Pre War..? Canlander. Middle school. Old school. Brawl! The list goes on, it is a microcosm of MTG- everyone does what format they want, just like multiplayer has players doing their thing most of the time.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”